[AMPS] FCC Actions at Dayton

[Rich Measures]

>
>frank ayers jr wrote:
>>
>>>And I believe the 
>>>FCC's rules intended to prevent use of ham amplifiers by CBers were and
>>are 
>>>ineffectual and misguided. 
>>
>>Something I was thinking about was the 15 db gain stuff. Most 10 meter rigs
>>can generate 100 watts or so for an amp. But, on six meters, a lot of hams
>>run rigs/transverters with 10 watts or so out. Amps for over a kw (~1200w)
>>are gonna need 40 watts to drive them. So, we wind up with a rig run into a
>>brick designed for 120 watts out but throttled to 50 (and close to class C)
>>running into your QRO amp de jour. Presto, instant diathermy machine. Too
>>bad the regs wouldn't allow a nice tetrode amp with good screen regulation.
>>Seems that anybody who could modify a 6 meter monobander for CB could just
>>as well get a solid state amp kit.
>
>This 6m problem had puzzled me, too, when G4GHP and I were thinking
>about developing a 2 x 4CX400A amp kit for 6m as well as 2m. Obviously,
>if the kits couldn't be exported legally to the USA, the whole project
>wouldn't fly.  Having downloaded all the detailed rules [1] and studied them 
carefully,
>there seemed to be no legal way to do this. 

€  One workaround is to sell parts kits from two sources.  Neither parts 
kit can be used to build an amplifier.   The assembly instructions would 
be available from a third party.  
>
>The rules are very detailed
>and they seem to cover all possible dodges to modify an existing amp for
>CB use, 

€  hardly a sound wager.  

>but they do it by excluding many legitimate activities such as
>manufacturing and buying a monoband 6m amp.
>
>And yet... Command Technology have a nice little 6m amp on the market
>that has been advertised for years, must have sold a lot, and was even
>reviewed in QST - and all with no reaction from the FCC, until last
>weekend.
>
>Asking ARRL staff (unofficially) about their interpretation of the
>rules, I had the clear impression that ARRL were happy to treat the 6m
>rules as "dead law" - hence the totally favorable QST review of a
>product that is technically illegal. 
>
>The HF amp rules are obviously very much alive, but manufacturers and
>buyers have learned to live with that.
>
€  and so have them good-ol'-boy CB semi-technicians who charge $50 to 
$100 for the 15 or so minutes of work needed to obviate the bureaucrats'  
rules.  //  It seems to me that the a better way to go after the problem 
is to go after the offenders.      For instance:  In Saudi Arabia, they 
have a fairly strict law against drunk driving.  In a case about eight 
years ago, a drunk Saudi driver crashed into the back of a parked car, 
igniting the fuel in its gasoline tank.  One person in the parked car was 
burned to death.  The drunk driver escaped without serious injury.  .  In 
California, the drunk driver might have received a year or two in jail 
plus probation from a liberal judge.   The Saudi judge that heard the 
case came up with a longer lasting solution.   As the public gathering 
watched, the offending driver was handcuffed to the steering wheel of his 
car.  The judge's sentence was read.  Saudi police poured gasoline 
through the windows of the car.  A torch was tossed.  .  The good things 
about cruel and unusual punishments is they serve as a better deterrent 
and they have a lower recitivism rate.  .  .  
>........
-  cheers, Ian


Rich...

R. L. Measures, 805-386-3734, AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures  


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm